Changing Shape of Politics

7/30/2019 Changing Shape of Politics

1/4

CHANGING SHAPE OF POLITICS: RISE OF

TECHNOCRACY IN AN AGE OF

DEMOCRACY

Hammad Raza

We are witnessing an obviously increasing tendency towards the technocratization of

contemporary political-decision making processes regardless of their social and political

structures in any state. Theorists of economy and diplomacy in the West assure that the

momentum of technocracy is such that we now live under a managerial system which has,

somewhat imperceptibly, come to replace dirty politicians and self-aggrandizing machinationsof this class. On the other hand, we have also witnessed a huge, stupendous growth of

bureaucracy in the post-capitalist societies of the post-colonial states. We are justified in

attempting to elaborate a theory of bureaucracy and technocracy which would be more

comprehensive and more satisfying than the fashionable and to a large degree meaningless

clich: managerial society or post-industrial society. J. Burnham proposed that rise of

professional experts would create a new class to replace old ruling classes. Ralph Dahrendolf, a

spearhead of the Critical Theory, holds that the managerial system can replace old conflicts and

create new shared interests of new classes. Knowledge is a raw material in post industrial

society, but in a state like Pakistan imported knowledge and expertise come to replace primary

sectors of education as well as economy. The rise of technocratic power intensifies conflict over

interests amongst traditional power-holders, democratic forces and new players. It is not,

however, easy to come to grips with the problem of technocracyan offshoot of

bureaucratization of modern societies in an age of post-industrial democracy.

There is a flurry of reports that new interim set-up under tutelage of clean, neat and

honest technocrats with their linguistic sophistry and international experience in multinational

corporations will be placed in Pakistan soon. The replacement will be done under supervision of

the Supreme Court of Pakistan as feared by many. It will wreck disaster in Pakistan again as

these imported experts without having any stake inside Pakistan, would put hidden financial

burden on masses. Since the emergence of military as the absolute stakeholder in the power


2/4

game of Pakistan, new crop of experts flies like bees on the ministerial posts of Pakistan to get a

pie out of financial spoil. Sometimes it is the rhetoric of good governance and sometimes it is

financial streamlining of the economy which necessitated the selection of financial and policy

experts known as technocrats to occupy significant positions within policy-making realm.

Preference of selection over election is a significant part of this scheme to keep state of affairs

clear of all dirty politicians. This arrangement has gained so much popularity that even during

democratic periods; technocrats often occupy important positions to ensure the continuity of

policies framed during authoritarian regimes. Change is just opium for the people of Pakistan

besides religion. Technocrats neglect the sociological aspects of politics and economics and keep

a monochromatic view of state of affairs. Their ignorance about the concepts of social solidarity

and its significance to modern economics often results into explosive violence on

fragmentational lines.

It is usually argued that technocratic governments can deliver to the people better than

democratically elected people through elections. The raison dtre behind this argument is that

technocrats have expertise at their disposal and possessed strong negotiating position vis--vis

international donors and diplomats. They act in the name of national interests but discard the idea

of social betterment. It is often forgotten that government by technocrats is for technocrats and

bureaucrats. Their impersonal relationship with people further depoliticizes and alienates society

from larger political framework. Technocrats do possess expertise, but their expertise can be

useful in research, teaching, consultancy and development sectors not in decision making

process. Centralization of authority and marginalization of ethnic minority are inevitable results

of technocratic ascendency over democratic forces in the Third World. During Musharraf era a

perfect arrangement was put into practice for technocrats to work within an engineered

democratic system with upper hand. The head of that government Mr. Shaukat Aziz, a self-styled

economic wizard, stabilized macro-economic indicators through statistical juggling of economy

without realizing the fact that economy is not merely a number-game, but it has deep human andsocial relationship. What happened? An unholy nexus of high-tech luxury and modern identity

became part and parcel of todays Pakistan. Apple, Nokia, Toyota and Honda have done more

harm to traditional family system than Bollywood and over-sexed Hollywood movies in

contemporary Pakistan.


3/4

Similarly the establishment of the Higher Education Commission and its placement under

a technocrat are vivid examples of this unimaginative approach to run important departments of

state under impersonal and corporate styled experts. What were the achievements of the Higher

Education Commission is still debatable, but one fact is very clear to all and sundry that pumping

of national resources for one decade into this educational misadventure has produced nothing

expect rubble of pirated scholars and copy, cut and paste researchers. Catering to conservative

middle-class youth became the sole aim of this misdirected project. Now this disgruntled youth

is waiting for the tsunami of Imran Khan to change their lot. Political and social activism is well-

nigh absent amongst hyper educated youth. What the HEC failed to do was to cultivate a strong

sense of creativity and egalitarian ideas amongst its caterers.

In economic arena, the situation is not different. For technocrats it is quite feasible to

adhere to structural adjustment programmes initiated by international financial institutions as

they are not concerned with the welfare of the very people whom they are supposed to serving.

They increase taxes, cut subsidies, neglect rural sector, initiate mega-projects like constructing

dams etc. It is worthy to note that majority of mega-projects were initiated during military

regimes when technocrats were serving the economy of Pakistan. Most of these economic

wizards come from international financial institutions and banking sectors, therefore it is not

quite surprising that they take economic view of politics and not vice-versa. Much obsessed with

macro-economic stability, they degenerate society into economic morass in imperceptible ways.

The term technocracy itself suggests the rule of the "technique", of the expertise or

skilla peculiar feature of service providing impersonal economic order, of something parasitic

and hostile, which has assumed life of its own and reigns over human beings in neo-liberal

economic model. The premise of this model is based on the supremacy of market over society

and the necessity of technocrats to manage market relations at institutionally macro level. In

common parlance, we also speak about the lifeless technocrats, about the men who form that

mechanism adeptly. The human beings that administer the state look as if they were lifeless, as if

they were mere cogs in the machine ruled under coercive forces like military apparatuses. In

other words, we are confronted here in the most condensed, in the most intensive form with the

reification of relationships between human beings, with the appearance of life in technical

mechanisms, in modern system of neo-liberal capitalism. This, of course, immediately brings to


4/4

our mind the great complex of fetishism: over the whole area of our market economy man seems

to be at the mercy of things, of commodities, even of currencies and services. Human and social

relationships become objectified, whereas objects seem to assume the force and power of living

elements. This system of over-powering governance has rendered Pakistan, since technocratic

onslaught, a violent state and, unfortunately, political players have to bear the brunt of this mess

at every level.

How far this alienation of people Pakistani state can further tolerate is to be seen? If

technocratic power grows concomitantly with the problems of people, then Pakistan would

certainly become what Richard Rose termed as an hour-glass society wherein rule of

impersonal oppression would be absolute and state and societal relationships would remain in

permanent conflict. Lets give democratic forces a chance to play their part in constructing the

image of Pakistan as a pro-people and pro-human state!

Writer is working as coordinator to the VC of the University of Gujrat. He can be

reached at [email protected]

Changing Shape of Politics

Documents

Transcript of Changing Shape of Politics